"David J Taylor" <david-tay...@blueyonder.not-this-part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid> writes:
>"Unruh" <unruh-s...@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message >news:fhjam.47784$db2.22...@edtnps83... >[] >>>Most interesting, Bill. Mine is a relatively cheap and cheerful device >>>from Netgear (GS608): >> >>> http://www.netgear.co.uk/ethernet_network_switch_gs605.php >> >>>so whether being very simple and unmanaged is likely to mean that it's >>>performance is better or worse I leave to speculation or measurement! >> >> Ours are top of the line 32 port Cisco switches (University) >To clarify; those are the ones with the poor performance? Yes. You can see the effect at www.theory.physics.ubc.ca/chrony/chrony.html The roundtrip and offset is plotted there. It used to be that they were all like monopole or dilaton (.14ms roundtrip, and .01ms offset--consistant-- getting their time from string, the ntp refclock-- plugged into the same switch monopole has a 100Mb card ( and is a 300MHz machine) while dilaton has a Gb card and is a 2.4GHz machine. It is just bizzare. _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
